Bijla Singh

so then whose beliefs are right,

akj or talsali?

what ur saying makes no sense, of cors

you have different view points,

then why did guru ji include writings of muslims and hindus in the SGGS?

everyone will see life and sikhi in there own way,

i dont understand why you "Hate"?

also have you actually met any of thses nihangs?

if not then please why do u curse them?

the original post was about uk "nangs" not akj or taksal. even then, both agree that meat and sukha is prohibited in sikhi and gurbani clearly proves it. it is not about hatred but about Sikhi. you cannot change sikhi and expect other sikhs to accept you with open arms. Guru Ji punished masands for doing wrong things under the name of sikhi. Why didn't He accept their "view points"? Why didn't 7th Guru Ji accept "view points" of Raam Rai? Guru Ji added bani of bhagats who were neither hindus nor muslims and their views do not contradict with Guru Ji's Bani. Do not forget that some other bhagats came to Guru Ji from Lahore but Guru Ji rejected their bani. only the truth was accepted not anyone's "viewpoints". should we accept gandhi's "viewpoints" who called Guru Gobind Singh Ji "a misguided warrior"? should we accept indira's beliefs of hating Sikhi? "nangs" do bad things under the name of Sikhi and I am against it. killing animals, drinking and smoking is not part of sikhi. if they want to do it then I don't

care but if they do it to prove that it is part of Sikhi then I am totally against it. i am not cursing anyone, just simply speaking against them for misrepresenting Sikhi and for writing against great Gursikhs. No one needs to meet them. I can tell what kinda ppl they are by reading their sites and beliefs about Sikhi and Gursikhs. I never met indira gandhi or massa ranghar but I know what kinda ppl they were. but let's just say yes i have met those "nangs" now what? Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh

Deep Singh Ji, the discussion is about whether this story is true or not. discussion is not about what we learn from this story. by coming up with some "message" of the story we are also putting down the shaheedi of Bhai Sahib. If Guru Ji gave blessing of shaheedi to bhai sahib then did guru ji say "i bless you with gift of shaheedi for reorganizing Gurbani"? hard to believe. Bhai Sahib Ji stayed with Guru Ji since childhood, knew Gursikhi inside out, wrote Guru Granth Sahib Ji and knew exactly how Guru Ji wanted him to write. Gursikh like him wouldn't make such a mistake. Why didn't he ask Guru Ji to write Bani according to Gurus and then Bhagats? What year did he do it in? He was never alone at Darbar Sahib so who else took part in it? Bhai Raam Kaur Ji (Gurbakash Singh) was a great kathavaachak during those times and was very near to Bhai Sahib. Where was he when Bhai Sahib Ji did it? Why didn't he consult Baba Deep Singh Ji or any other great Gursikhs? did he want to surprise them all?

I have read this story in a history book and it sounds horrible just imagining how Bhai Sahib would've done it. So basically, he removed the "jilad" or hardcover, all the pages were separated and then reorganized so how did the numbering go on pages? 1,2,3,7,58...something like this? seems illogical. or to have page numbers in order he probably rewrote the whole bani and made it a new saroop. right? If the saroop exists then provide details. what year was it written in? who got ahold of it and who kept it for all these centuries? how is the page number system? During those difficult times, Mughals went from house to house, killed Sikhs, banned on usin

g the word "Gur" threw many saroops and books in the rivers. how did this manage to survive if this saroop was at someone's house? Damdami Bir Sahib was lost in Wadda Ghalughara. Whatever Khalsa Panth kept survived. Nothing was safe in any house. so if this saroop survived then Khalsa Panth must have kept it which is not true.

I can come up with any story to malign some gursikh's shaheedi but cannot justify it by saying the message we learn is great. We must look at if this story makes sense and it does not. good messages come from good stories. This is all what I think. I have strong belief that Bhai Sahib Ji never did anything like this. If you really wanted to learn what happens when you mess with bani then you would look at Sobha Singh and Bhasaurs. They were punished. Why didn't Akal Takhat bless them with Shaheedi too? a Sikh changes bani and he gets shaheedi. what a sinful way to get blessings.

and sukhsingh, I never read anything on ddt.com. even if I assume Guru Ji never said anything to Bhai Mani Singh Ji about shaheedi that still does not mean Bhai Sahib Ji reorganized Bani. and I am not interested in knowing your "nidar nang" version of history. If sangat cursed Bhai Sahib then obviously he received punishment not shaheedi. If you wanted to debate you would've provided details. btw, some of posts still await your answers.

Bottom Line, you mess with Bani you are punished not blessed with shaheedi. Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh

famous story means nothing. no reasoning provided. if this is true then all the details should be provided. this story is illogical and totally makes no sense in any way. 1430 pages do not show completness of Gurbani. puratan saroops have more pages. gurbani is not limited to pages.

When 46 gursikhs went to sachkhand, Guru Ji stopped Baba Deep Singh Ji and Bhai Mani SIngh Ji and intructed them to start Taksals. Guru JI told Baba Deep SIngh JI that even if His head gets separated from the body His gyan will still increase and told Bhai Mani SIngh JI that if his body was cut into pieces his gyan will still stay the same. this is the real story.

looking at historical facts we know that Gursikhs were martyred just to destroy SIkhi. Bhai Taru SIngh JI, Bhai Shabeg SIngh Shabaaz SIngh JI, Bhai Mati Das Ji and all others became shaheed which is not a sign of punishment but a sign of glory. Bhai Mani SIngh Ji being shaheed is glorious too but if the so called story is true then Bhai Sahib's shaheedi was nothing but a punishment and there is no glory to it. if the story is true then no one would call it a shaheedi in the first place. so stop twisting it around and trying to come up with some other meanings. 18th century Gursikh knew more about Gurbani and Sikhi than all of us. major difference between 18th and 21st century is this:

1) gursikhs in 18th century did what Guru Ji said

2) gursikhs in 21st century want Guru Ji to do what they say.

believing in these stories show how foolish we have become and how much we know about our history. Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh

total BS. ppl need to come into their senses before they start talking about Bhai Mani Singh Ji and all the 18th century Gursikhs.

Why should people have different view points about Sikhi? Gurbani and Rehatnamas clearly tell us what Sikhi and rehat is. Besides, their actions tell us everything about them. No one needs to meet them and no one needs to know their "viewpoints". indira attacked Sikhi and clearly everyone knew what kind of person she was or did Sikhs need to go meet her to understand her "view points" of sikhi and what she thought about Sant Jarnail Singh Ji "using" Darbar Sahib? yeah we should respect gandhi's view points about Guru Gobind Singh Ji. right? my point is without even meeting the "nangs" people can understand who they really are. and one last note do you respect when they call Bhai Fauja Singh Ji "nang" or when they say Sant Gurbachan Singh Ji used to consume "sukha" big time? good luck on being that kinda open minded. Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh

somebody told me that if u do a lot of path then guru ji comes into your dream and talks to u. i was wondering if it is true. so can u guys please tell me if u have heard about something like that and if it is true?

why don't you try it and see it yourself. then let us know.

"Waras Shah Na Aadtaan Jandeeyan Nay, Bhavain Kateeye Poriyan Poriyan Ji"

People who don't adapt Sikhi lifestyle after taking Amrit are still pretty much in caste.

Wooden sandal (of Baba Nanak ) was kept as a memory and he was woshipped in Mecca.

Go anywhere in the world, you would not find a place bereft of the name of Baba Nanak.

Without discrimination of Hindu or Muslim, in every house, the Baba is revered.

When the sun rises it cannot be covered and it lightens the whole world.

When the lion roared in the jungle the flocks of deer ran away.

If someone wants to conceal moon by putting before it a platter, it cannot be hide.

From rising to setting directions i.e from east to west, all the nine divisions of earth bowed before Baba Nanak.

He diffused his power in whole of the world.

(Bhai Gurdaas Ji in Vaars Bhai Gurdaas on Pannaa 1)

The Nishan Sahib from olden times flown by the Akali Nihangs (and are still flown at processions by the Nihangs) are plain blue flags.

do you mean Nishaan Sahib was changed and Kesri Nishaan Sahib with Khanda is not the original one? please explain. you can pm me if you want cuz this is all going off topic.

Guru Ji "Vekho Panth Di Halat, Bahut Sabak Sikh leeyaa, Sumat Bakhso Tay Khalsa Raaj Sathapat Karo".

When the reader is doing the padched by themselves they will of course make mistakes. Perhaps even MORE than they would with Padched saroops. Isn't reading SHUDH Bani a goal of every Sikh? Also, let's say the answer to that question is that Guru Sahib will give you the mat to read Bani correct. What if two equally chardeekalaa gursikhs have a different way of reading a thukh? Who's right? Who's wrong? The same mistakes by the reader that occcur with padched saroop will occur in lareevaar. So what have we accomplished by lareevaar?

Veer Ji, there might be differences in reading bani but that in no way justifies separating the words and then printing it. Also, in ladivaar you will have to take santhiya. two gursikh might read one panktee in two different ways or even three or four. but that doesn't matter. the point here is that reading bani is different than printing bani in pad-ched.

I'm sure the panth agrees on the padched version of 90% of the Gurbani in Padched Saroops.

Bani in pad-ched or ladivaar is not in the question but printing bani in pad-ched which is separating the words.

Only Guru Sahib know what the true meanings of Gurbani are so in other words only Guru Sahib can do correct pad-ched. All we can do is try. I have heard many Gursikhs say that with avastha the meanings of Gurbani change.

Singh Ji, if we cannot understand the true meanings of Gurbani then what is the point? Gurbani has meany meanings and higher in avstha you go higher the meanings are but all those meanings lead to the same way and never contradict each other. I am assuming that by "true" you did not mean that Gurbani has only one meaning which only Guru Ji knows because then why have something we cannot understand ever? I have learned from some gursikhs two/three meanings of some tuks but all correct. they go higher and higher they are more you enjoy.

what we are saying is that now that it is done, we still have to do the same satkar of the saroop as we would a larivaar saroop. but in the future there should be no more printings of pad-chhed.

Rehat is to do five banis in the morning. SGPC changed it to 3 so now it is done we should respect it and make sure no one makes it different in the future? makes no sense veer ji. "someone" made keski optional but why should we respect it? since when did "options" become acceptable in sikhi?

One quick question here. Did Guru Sahib give us the actual PHYSICAL form of Guru Granth Sahib, or did he give us Sh

abad Guru / Gurbani? If the answer is Gurbani, then the form in which Gurbani comes shouldn't be an issue? or should it?

Guru Ji said that "If you want to have my darshan then have darshan of the shabad Guru. If you want to talk to me then read Bani". This means if we separate the words wrongly, it gives different meanings and Guru Ji once gave punishment to a Sikh for reading Bani wrong. read all the posts. your question has been answered before.

1. What is the main point for people who are adamant about lareevar? Is it simply that lareevaar was the original form so it should it shouldn't changed? Or is there some Gurmat oriented explanation? It can't be because they think that with lareevaar less mistakes in reading Gurbani will occur. I think that people will make MORE.

this question has been answered before as well. there is difference between reading bani and printing bani in pad-ched. how do you not see it veer ji? if we read bani wrong then we should take santhiya and correct it but why separate the words?

What about all the people in this world who have benefitted from the padshed saroop? Would ANY of us be the people that we are today if we didn't have good old Sikhitothemax aiding us along the way? I know I'm a better person after I read from Guru Granth Sahib Jee at home.

for all those people we should change the form of shabad? why? if their lives were totally changed wo

uldn't they take amrit and follow akal takhat sahib which clearly states that pad-ched is wrong. we would be lot better people with santhiya.

Panth has faced loss with pad-ched. Once a family of monays came to Baba Deep Singh Ji Gurdwara and wanted to take Maharaaj Ji home for Akahand Paath. One gursikh worker there asked them if they needed paathis also but they said no they would do it themselves. monays doing akahand paath sahib? imagine that. So that gursikh gave them ladivaar saroop and they left. couple minutes later they came running back because they couldn't read Bani. Then they requested paathis and akhand paath sahib was done from ladivaar. with pad-ched more people don't get benefits but more people disrespect bani.

3. Does this mean that all Gutkay and Pothis must be lareevaar?

why not? puratan gutka of Baba Deep Singh Ji is in ladivaar.

khalistani and taksali veer ji. Sant Kartar Singh Ji once said in his katha that "Taksali" means one who goes to Taksal. Taksal is a school and only a student of this school is taksali. So are you students of taksal? ever been students? don't take me wrong here but if you are not then what makes you taksali? only respecting taksal so much doesn't justify the answer because that would mean me or someone else has less respect which is not true.

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh

Sehjo Kaur Ji, Nishaan Sahib represents that Sikhs are a separate Quam. Which quam has their own flag? any? Guru Ji gave us everything different. Guru Ji created a new quam and that quam must have a Nishaan Sahib. Also, it is not only about khanda, but triangular shape, farla etc. represent many things. Shaheed Singhs do pehra around Nishaan Sahib not the khanda only. sorry for going off topic. our local nanaksar has one but i think it is because sangat forced them too. their many customs didn't make sense to me but after talking to one person who been with nanaksar for a long time i understood why they do things the way they do it. Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh

khalistani veer ji please don't take me wrong here but you do not make much sense to me. if bani is saroop and bani written in pad-ched is not according to gurmat then how could the saroop be according to gurmat? Sant Ji said pad-ched is wrong therefore, saroops in pad-ched is wrong. paper, ink etc is not saroop but bani is saroop. but if i am wrong then please tell me what you mean by "saroop" being right and not pad-ched? what kind of saroop is this without bani? Sant Ji clearly said that bani written in pad-ched is wrong which means saroop written in pad-ched is wrong. it is not about pronunciation and not about how you read bani but it is about how words are written and which Saroop is the real King that sits on the throne. even british printed saroops in ladivaar. they would've printed in pad-ched if it was according to gurmat.

"laakhkaroreeba(n)dhhnparai ||" Pannaa 264

how would you separate these words? in which way?

taksal says: "laakh karoree ba(n)dhhn parai ||"

SGPC says: "laakh karoree ba(n)dhh n parai ||"

two different meanings. written in two different ways and even pronunciation is different. hence it is not the same thing.

please correct me. Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh

Pakistan has yet to pay for 1947. Souls of 1947 and 1984 will destroy both countries. countries founded on oppression and injustice never last long.

Singhs have written some very good posts on this. I would like to add that all puratan hand written saroops are ladivaar saroops including Dasam Granth saroops. When British printed few small saroops 1" by 1" even those were printed ladivaar. I myself had darshan of one of those saroops. very hard to read even with maginifying glass. puratan gutkas are in ladivaar. Dasam Granth Kamar Kassa gutka of Baba Deep Singh Ji still exists today at Takhat Damdama Sahib. it is in ladivaar saroop. At Darbar Sahib, they only used to do parkash of hand written ladivaar but recently they changed it to printed version but still it is ladivaar. taksal gives santhiya from ladivaar saroops.

SGPC decided to make it pad-ched and also decided to change "Manglacharans" which is rearranging Bani. for example, if there was written "Mahalla 5, Ikoankar Satugur Parsaad" SGPC wanted to make it "Ikoankar Satugur Parsaad, Mahalla 5". they started printing these saroops. it was during 1st war with pakistan and singhs couldn't win the morcha. few members went to Sant Gurbachan Singh Ji and some other great gursikhs for help. they all said if they put stop to changing manglacharans and leave everything to the original version then Maharaaj will do kirpa and they agreed. Singhs won the morcha and war and also sikhs won morcha of punjab sooba. If strict measures are taken to stop pad-ched printing then I think Panth will go upwards in winning the morchas.

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh

1) habhae saak koorraavae ddit(h)ae tho palai thaiddai laagee ||1|| 963

with gay marriage should it be changed to "laaga"?

2) gay marriage is non-procreative in all ways. God created a balance and for the creation to exist only man and woman can do it. two arguments are used against this.

a) after woman reaches menopause, sex is also non-procreative. this argument fails because gay marriage is non-procreative for all times and it is very dangerous for a woman to have a baby after 45 or 50. so this argument does not hold. any gay couple cannot have a baby unless they adopt a child but it is still non-procreative. menopause is a natural process whereas gay thing is totally unnatural.

b) marriage ppl use condoms or birth pills so it is non-procreative also. still this argument fails because gay sex is non-procreative with or without condoms or birth pills.

3) "Eaka Naari Jati Hoae" it does not say "eaka purakh" does it? it clearly refers to man to have only one wife not one husband.

4) "Until the day you take your last breath, you must take this in and never forget it. You must forever keep respect for your wife. You must never go onto another women’s bed, even in a dream." (Sri Dasam Granth Ang 842)

does not say "onto another man's bed". proves that union between only man and woman is acceptable in Sikhi.

5) Khanda----a symbol that represents so many things. but look at the double edged sword in the middle. it has three edges. one on the top represents one Waheguru who is above all. two edges on the sides represent balance of God i.e. man woman, hell heaven, good bad etc. gay marriage goes against th

at balance.

This is speaking from Sikhi point of view. as said in earlier posts by other ppl that one cannot be gay and sikh at the same time. there can be difference between what Sikhs do and what Sikhi teaches. Look at what Sikhi teaches not what Sikhs do and how they do it. I am done. Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh

I would like to correct something I wrote earlier. I found four books instead of two.

1) one of the oldest book written in Sikhi. "Sainpat Gursobha Singh". He writes the most important incidents during Guru Ji's life like meeting Banda Singh and Singh taking over punjab. not much talk about wedding of Guru Ji but it does mention Guru Ji getting married to Mata Sahib Kaur Ji after Mata Jeeto Ji passed away. very brief account.

2) This one is called "Dasmesh Guru Chamatkaar" by Professor Kartar Singh Chawla. weddings mentioned. first, on page 77, 2nd on 86 and third on 484.

3) "Dasam Guru Chamtkaar" by Sodhi Teja Singh. 1st wedding on page 59, 2nd on 70 and third on 421.

4) Most important of all. published in 1900 which is 104 years old. falling apart and luckily i have only volume three which talks about from seventh Nanak to tenth Nanak. it starts from page 591 and name of the author is not known. on ths last page author wrote some details about the book. He called it "Vaartak Sooraj Parkash" because it took him 5 years and so much time to write it. date is written 1900 "eesvee". three weddings are mentioned. 1st on 762, 2nd on 801 and third one on 918. This book is the only book that goes into more depth. It mentions Guru Ji taking four rounds around Guru Granth Sahib Ji with Mata Sahib Kaur Ji and raagis doing kirtan.

There you have four proofs and two from puratan books. Last three books clearly mention that Mata Ajeet kaur Ji and Mata Sundari Ji lived together at Anandpur Sahib and four Sahibzadays were born not born from one Mata Ji. Mata Ajeet kaur Ji passed awayduring time of Guru Ji and saskaar took place. couple years later Mata Sahib Kaur

JI married Guru Ji. Both Mata Jis passed away in Delhi.

Sikhs have one Guru and the same Guru had more than one wife in sixth form which everybody accepts and same Jot, same Guru had more than one wife in tenth form. Guru Gobind Singh Ji did not create a very new maryada. JapJi sahib, Anand Sahib, rehraas Sahib and Sohila Sahib existed and Gursikhs used to recite these banis before Khanday Batay Da Amrit. Amrit was there but Guru Ji changed it so that people later on could become "Guru Wale". Only Guru could make someone His chela so Guru Ji passed these rights to Panj Pyare. This is why Guru Ji changed Amrit ceremony. By saying Guru Gobind Singh Ji practiced maryada so his sikhs could follow it, implying that He himself had one wife is wrong because it implies that having more than one wife was acceptable before but then it was changed. Same Guru had more than one wife doesn't matter what form. There is no difference between Guru Hargobind Ji and Guru Gobind Singh Ji. Jot is the same therefore, Guru is the same. it wasn't like polygamy was accepted before and then Guru Gobind Singh Ji restricted it to only one wife and changed the maryada. Maryada was built over 240 years and Guru Ji added more and more to make human being perfect and Sant Sipahi. Guru Ji is always without Panj chor and saying "why can't I have three wives if Guru Ji had three" is a complete lust for human beings. the general point was to teach Sikhs to live gristi jeevan and Guru Ji lived it first. think about how many ethical problems would arise if polygamy was accetable in Sikhi.

This is all I have to say. I am done with providing proofs. It is your turn now Singh Ji. provide solid proofs that Guru Ji had only one wife otherwise this is over and I am done for question/answer thing. I am not here to convince anyone. believe in what you want. I only wanted to prove that my belief stands on something. Bhul Chuk Khima.

"He alone is a Sikh, a friend, a relative and a sibling, who walks in the Way of the Guru

9;s Will. One who walks according to his own will, O Siblings of Destiny, suffers separation from the Lord, and shall be punished." Pannaa 601

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh

And why is everyone stating that Mata Sahib Kaur Ji was spiritual wife of Guru Gobind Singh Ji? All I have read or heard is that she is spiritual mother of Khalsa.

Singh Ji, you told me to stay away from what I have "heard" so you do the same. Also, as I have stated earlier, If Mata Sahib Kaur Ji was made Khalsa's mother then She must be Guru Ji's wife. Any bibi other than Guru JI's Mehal is Guru Ji's daughter. Mata Sahib Kaur Ji was part of Khalsa Panth so if she was not Mehal of Guru Ji then She was definitely Guru Ji's daughter but that is wrong. Also, She is called "Mata" because Guru JI's Mehal is always referred to as "Mata".

I also respect Baba Ji's views and everything he's done BUT his views do contradict views of other Maha Purakhs, this is NOT to prove that Baba Gurbhachan Singh Ji was ANY LOWER than other Sikhs but just to point out that even Gursikhs can have different point of views, because after all they are Sikhs, not Guru Sahib. Right? "Bhullan Andar Sab Ko Abhull Guru Kartar" Remember this?

I totally understand this SIngh Ji but please provide names of Gursikhs who wrote that Guru Ji in tenth form had only one wife. I

am not interested to know whom he had what differences with. You cannot call someone wrong without any reason. If Sant Ji wrote wrong, give reasons and provide solid proofs.

Thanks for understanding my point. So when we might talk about Bhai Santokh Singh Ji's opinion or research about Guru Sahib having more than one wife, I think we would need to think if that has milavat aswell or not.

Again, need reasons. I provided reasons for raag maala. Bhai Sahib Ji clearly wrote that "I don't know why Guru Ji wrote Raag Maala". which proves that He did not do any research on this. Sooraj Parkash is work from Sau Sakhi (older version), Gurblias and Mahima Parkash and none of these books talk about raag maala being the issue. sooraj parkash is the first one and it provides no details and no reasons. I gave you my reasons for not accepting this part of sooraj parkash. You provide your reasons for not accepting Guru Ji having three wives and saying "i just don't" doesn't cut it.

One wrong thing in a book does not mean everything is wrong in the book. For example, Bhai Kahan Singh Nabha wrote in Mahaan Kosh that gurmantar is "Wahguru". now tell me, would you not accept it at all? This book is very valuable source for us and so is sooraj parkash. one wrong thing in mahaan kosh does not mean all of the book is wrong and same applies to sooraj parkash.

And I hope you cannot prove that Guru Sahib went and killed or hunted animals at random?

Guru Ji is maha kaal and He has

every right to kill any animal or human being. but Guru Ji did not kill randomly. there is an article on the net which talks about all the animals and birds Guru Ji killed and details reasoning is provided of their previous births. i will try to find it but you might have it. Guru JI did not kill randomly.

Could someone might have built these angeethaas after wards? What proof is there that there that there angeethas were actually of Guru Sahib's ji's mehals?

very nice way to turn your back on something you don't want to accept. raag maala was added by "someone". Shabad in Dasam Granth about Panj Kakkar was added by "someone" and now this. if someone built this then Gursikhs would've known about it. they didn't live in jungles forever unattached from what was going on in Gurdwaras. also, what proofs are there that these are not the real angeethas? who built these then? any name, proof, year? but let me walk you through some things.

Singhs always used to visit Gurdwaras and repaired them from time to time. Sardar Baghel Singh and Sardar Jaasa Singh Raamgharia took over Delhi and did seva of all the gurdwaras. if angeethas were wrong they would've destroyed them. lets assume angeethas were built when mahants took over. even then this argument fails because gursikhs were still there and knew Sikhi. Gursikhs took over Gurdwaras and removed all the idols then surely they could've destryoed these angeethas. but they did not. Bhai Mani SIngh Ji was there when Mata Ji passed away and angeetha was built during his time. Where Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji gave sacrifice, that place still exists inside Gurdwara Sahib. any proof this is the exact place? Gursikh sin 18th century knew exactly where what happened and they buried peera

sahib or something else to keep record. in case, mughals destroyed gurdwara buildings, sikhs would know where the gurdwara should be built. this was intentions and so much advance thinking of Sikhs.

She was made the spiritual wife of Khalsa, and this not apply that she automatically also became spiritual wife of Guru Sahib.

first of all, i assume you meant to write "mother of khalsa" but even then how is that possible? We call her Mata because She was Mehal of Guru Ji. i have written about it above.

Just like we do not call Guru Tegh Bahadar Sahib Ji our grand father and Mata Gujar Kaur Ji our grand mother and so on. Do we?

no we don't because there is no difference between Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji and Guru Gobind Singh Ji. is there? Guru Ji clearly says who the real "father" is. Jot is Guru not body so physical relation holds no meaning.

Which other Maha Purakhs have stated the same views as Sant Gurbhachan Singh Ji? If there are any that you know of, please let us know.

Sant Kartar SIngh Ji, Sant Jarnail Singh Ji, taksaal of Satto Wali Galee and many others but any naami gursikh wrote something opposite?

this post got so long. i will write anotehr one for proofs. Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa Waheguru Ji Ki

Fateh

man, if it is not Bhai Randhir Singh Ji, shame on me, cuz thats what I have been thinking after reading your post lol.. 

hahaha no singh ji. i was talking about Bhai Santokh Singh Ji.

Satjug or "Sat" (truth) always comes first. Treta meaning 3 left. Dwapar meaning two more left. Kaljug or Kaal always comes last. only this one left. cycle starts again. this is what I know. Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh

He called His horse Jaan Bhai.

was there any other name before that? my point was guru ji would never look at physical beauty and call someone "sundar"

All I said was that a husband can call his wife anything

wife can do the same too? i disagree with calling wife "anything".

Yes I don't know the reason why Gurujee called Mataji by that name, only He knows best.

yes and He knows the best why He had three wives. just because we don't know the reason does not mean it is wrong.

I think Bhai Randhir Singh Ji had only the doubt about Raagmala, but he did not know the truth. But sadly, this doubt made divisions among the Sikh Sangat. So why would we believe someone who does not know the truth???Bhai Sahib was a gre

at Gursikh, not the Guru. So why would anyone believe what he said what he is not even sure about.

Singh Ji, no one here questioned Bhai Randhir Singh Ji and no one here questioned raag maala. this is not related to the topic.

if Guru Ji did have 3 wifes, did they all exist at the same time, I mean did he marry the 2nd and 3rd wife while he still had the first wife, or he remarried after Guru Ji's first Joti Jot Sama gaye?

yes all existed at the same time. Mata Ajeet Kaur Ji passed away at Anandpur Sahib and other two passed away in Delhi. Mata Sahib Kaur Ji passed away when Guru Ji was in south and Mata Sundar Kaur Ji passed away after shaheedi of Baba Banda Singh Ji. I will have names of the authors by tomorrow.

the third is mata sahib kaur who is spiritually not phsically

no physical relationship, i agree but She became wife after Anand Karaj. hence, three wives.

Guru Ji did not need to marry anyone. He taught us to live "gristhi jeevan". It is not about 1, 2 or 3 wives but Guru Ji lived grithi jeevan because He taught Sikhs to live gristi jeevan and not leave the house to go live in jungles.

Waheguru Ji setup a way for creation to continue and for people to be born. Gurbani supports it. "maa kee rakath pithaa bidh dhhaaraa, moorath soorath kar aapaaraa ".

I don't know why it is so hard for people to accept Guru Ji had three wives. Sikhs have One Guru. Same Guru had

more than one wife in sixth form then what's wrong when it comes to tenth form? Guru is the same.

If anyone here has a solid proof of Guru Gobind SIngh Ji having only one wife then please post. why not solve this problem now on this forum and when someone else starts topic on this he/she could be given this reference to read. otherwise, this will go on again and again. or will the admins put this under "rules and guidelines" as "controversial topic"? Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh

I will get the names and other details of the books on sunday. Sant Gurbachan Singh Ji's source is reliable for me. He studied Sikhi for many years and was a great scholar. I haven't had the time to read Bhai Veer Singh Ji's books on Guru Gobind Singh Ji. hopefully i will someday.

You know when it comes to things like Raag Maala, you go and say there is 'milavat' in these texts and when you have something to support you, you go and use that?

Yes you are right and I say that because Bhai Sahib Ji clearly wrote that he has no idea who wrote raag maala and when it was written. and also he says he does not know why guru ji wrote it if this is work of Guru Ji. So Bhai Sahib had no clear idea on what he was talking about. first he says, Guru Ji did not write it and then he says he has no idea. you and me both know that not everything is wrong in these granths. there is milavat but it includes many sakhis that are very common and acceptable in SIkhi. all puratan granths have milavat and there is no doubt about it. sooraj parkash is written by using puratan sources like gurbilas. bhai veer singh ji gives very much detail about puratan historical books and when those were written and who wrote them. no book written before sooraj parkash talks about raag maala. well, that is not the point. my point is for few wrong things an old granth cannot be ignored. it is used for many common sakhis. there are two p

anth parkash and i am well aware of gyani gyan singh's work. with my limited knowledge i do not know what u mean by "works of bhangu". perhaps you could shed some light on that. as far as i know bhangu's work is better than gyan singh's.

I did not take anything personally. if you could help me to clear me doubt and help me learn more i will be grateful to you. your other points are well taken. i am not going to quit anything just because guru ji did so. that was my whole point. guru ji told sikhs to hunt animals the ones he pointed at. He never sent any SIkh to go out and kill animals. Guru Ji specifically pointed out the birds and animals and gave hukam to kill them. none of the Sikhs questioned and said "killing is against sikhi". hukam. thats it. guru ji is maha kaal and he gives life and death so He has every right to kill but we do not. Guru Ji was one with Waheguru and showed us a way to get there. we cannot do everything guru ji did and we should not try to. by saying "why can't i have more than one wife" are we not trying to compare ourselves with Guru Ji?

And even if he wore it, how can you compare this to having more than one wife?

simple point singh ji, Guru Ji can do lot more than Sikhs. He created Maryada for us. of course he followed it too. But, Guru Ji having 3 wives and humans having 3 wives is totally different. He is the One without panj chor and human are never without panj chor.

Guru Sahib also wrote shastars, are you also goign to stop wearing them because you cannot compare with Guru Sahib?

no. Guru Ji's hukam to keep shastars. Sikhi teaches to follow Hukam not to do "rees" of Guru Ji.

but lets put these aside and please answer (someone or you) the questions asked in previous posts.

1) why are there three angeethas?

2) How can Mata Sahib Kaur Ji be only spiritual wife of Guru Ji? how is that possible in Sikhi? "he lived practical life so his sikhs could follow it"------how can one have spiritual wife without going thru anand karaj.

3) any puratan sources that talk about only ONE wife of Guru Ji? or anything written by naami gursikhs on this? Sant Gurbachan Singh Ji wrote three wives, any other naami gursikh wrote differently? in which book?

please write answers. my humble request to you all. if i offended anyone i apolozige. Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh

A husband has the right to call his wife affectionately by any name, don't you think ?

physical beauty attracted Guru Ji? you really think so Singh Ji? Guru Gobind Singh Ji and Gurbani are the same. and you do know who Gurbani calls "beautiful ones". no doubt Mata Ji was beautiful but Guru Ji does not look at physical beauty and call someone "Sundar". and what was wrong with the first name? please enlighten me. Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh

Now being the great grandson of Guru Angad Sahib Ji, Sahib Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji was also his Sikh. So don't tell me he wouldn't follow command of Sri Guru Arjan Sahib Ji.

it is true. so by this it means whatever Guru Ji did, Sikhs are also allowed to do it. so can i hunt and wear kalgi? is it Sikhi? you are saying that if Guru Ji did not do something then he wouldn't tell Sikhs to do it but if Guru Ji did something then why wouldn't he tell Sikhs to do it i.e. hunting or to wear kalgi?

you said your backup sources are the talk you had with Baba Hardev Singh Ji (Luloo Vaal) and a book of either Bh. Sangat Singh or Gyani Sant Gurbhachan Singh Ji. So which other historial references are you talking about now?

don't remember anything about this in sangat singh's book. yes, Sant Gurbachan Singh Ji wrote about this. all taksals, nihung jathebandis share the similar belief. beside that I have two books on Guru Gobind Singh Ji, and have heard in katha that sooraj parkash and panth parkash both talk about 3 wives. three angeethas exist. how do you explain that? but maybe you can provide sources that talk about only one wife, besides that arti

cle and i will look into that to get my doubts cleared. never too late to learn something new. and please don't tell me Guru Ji called Mata Jeeto Ji, Sundari because she looked too beautiful.

Guru Hargobind JI had more than one wife but why is it not possible that Guru Gobind Singh Ji might have had similar situation. As I have read in the Jeevani of Guru Ji, it said that Guru Ji had one wife at first, second at baintee of Mata Ji, and third....well, one Sikh did ardaas of marrying his daughter to Guru when she was at young age. since then everyone started calling her mata ji and when he came to guru ji, Guru Ji refused to get married but Sikh requested that then no one would marry his daughter because everyone called her mata ji so Guru Ji married her but had no physical relationship with her. This mata ji was Mata Sahib Kaur Ji. When she asked for children Guru Ji pointed out to Khalsa and said "You are mother of Khalsa".

according to your quote "Avar Updeshe Aaap Naa Kare" Guru Ji would do Anand Karaj and then declare her his wife. without Anand Karaj, husband and wife relation is not established. Anand Karaj is not merely a physical relationship. as Guru Ji called it "two bodies and one soul" which implies that it is also spiritual relationship. w/o this Guru Ji would never accept anyone as His wife. Khalsa does not have parents who were never married through Anand Karaj.

Bhul Chuk Khima. correct me if i am wrong. my request.

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh

just to clarify that the "grave" is not muslim type of grave. Sikhs call it Angeetha Sahib where cremation took place.